'Hormones induce labor, not pregnancy,' says Classics Dept

While I was perusing the Editorial section of The Crimson this morning over a delightful lemon poppyseed muffin, I was stopped in my tracks and taken aback by a disturbing verbal usage in William Adams’ column, “Twenty-three is the Ugliest Number” (Nov. 10). In this column, the author’s mother is said to have been “injected with prostaglandin hormones to induce pregnancy.” To induce pregnancy, you wonder? That’s what I wondered as well...

At first, I doubted my sufficient knowledge of this word in the English lexicon. Perhaps pregnancy also carries with it a lesser-known meaning of “the act of giving birth.” Seeking some sort of resolution to my confusion, I contacted the source: the Harvard Classics Department.

Upon hearing my query and reading the offending excerpt, the illustrious chair of said department merely chuckled and repeatedly pointed out the misuse to his colleagues. Indeed, “pregnant” comes from the Latin “praegnans” meaning “before being born.” It carries no connotation of the actual event of the birth. A fellow Classicist remarked, “Those hormones must be carrying something else if they induce pregnancy!”

I consulted my premed comrades. After they too laughed at the usage, they informed me that prostaglandins do indeed induce CHILDBIRTH by increasing the activity of smooth muscle cells (as are found in the uterus).

ALEXIS Z. TUMOLO ’06

Nov. 10, 2004